当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Applied Social Psychology › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Perspective taking in conflict settings: Can perspective taking smooth tensions between Trump and Clinton supporters in the aftermath of 2016 U.S. presidential election?
Journal of Applied Social Psychology ( IF 2.654 ) Pub Date : 2021-04-26 , DOI: 10.1111/jasp.12772
Rezarta Bilali 1 , Erin Brooke Godfrey 1
Affiliation  

Can perspective taking improve intergroup attitudes in conflict contexts? How does a context of conflict shape people's responses to perspective-taking tasks and their ultimate effectiveness? The present study addressed these questions by examining the effect of perspective taking (compared with a perspective giving and a control condition) on intergroup attitudes between Trump and Clinton supporters (N = 537) one month after the 2016 presidential election. Perspective taking had positive effects on some intergroup attitudes: It increased warmth toward the outgroup (thermometer ratings), outgroup tolerance, perceived similarities between groups, and marginally increased positive outgroup evaluation. This study also sheds light on the mechanisms that might reduce the effectiveness of perspective taking in conflict settings by assessing the content and the effects of the induced perspectives in response to perspective-taking task. About half of the induced perspective-taking narratives involved negative views of the other, which were associated with worse intergroup outcomes. In addition, higher perceived intensity of the conflict between Trump and Clinton supporters and more negative emotions about the election outcome predicted more induced negative perspectives as a response to the perspective-taking task. In turn, negative perspectives were associated with more negative intergroup attitudes. To sum up, while perspective taking had an overall positive impact on intergroup attitudes in this conflict setting, its impact seems to be contingent upon the content of induced perspective-taking narratives.

中文翻译:

冲突环境中的透视:能否在 2016 年美国总统大选之后对特朗普和克林顿支持者之间的紧张局势进行缓和?

观点采择能否改善冲突环境中的群体间态度?冲突背景如何影响人们对观点采择任务的反应及其最终效果?本研究通过检查观点采择(与观点给予和控制条件相比)对特朗普和克林顿支持者之间的群体间态度的影响来解决这些问题(N = 537) 2016 年总统大选后一个月。观点采择对一些群体间的态度有积极的影响:它增加了对外群体的热情(温度计评级)、外群体的容忍度、群体之间的感知相似性,并略微增加了积极的外群体评价。本研究还通过评估在应对观点采择任务时诱发观点的内容和影响,揭示了可能会降低冲突环境中观点采择有效性的机制。大约一半的诱导性观点采择叙述涉及对另一个的负面看法,这与更糟糕的群体间结果有关。此外,特朗普和克林顿支持者之间冲突的更高感知强度以及对选举结果的更多负面情绪预示着更多的诱发负面观点是对观点采择任务的回应。反过来,消极观点与更消极的群体间态度相关联。总而言之,虽然在这种冲突环境中,观点采择对群体间态度产生了整体积极的影响,但其影响似乎取决于诱导性观点采择叙事的内容。
更新日期:2021-04-26
down
wechat
bug